Hamta Vikas Samiti, Kullu V. ITO, Kullu

ITA 467/CHANDI/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 68373 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-08-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 29-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N K SAINI
• Assessee Lawyers: R R THAKUR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES B,CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R.SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 467/CHD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2007-08 M/S HAMTA VIKAS SAMITI, VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER , V&PO PRINI, KULLU (H.P.). THE. MANALI, DISTT. KULU PAN NO. AAATH-5214K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI R.R.THAKUR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI N.K.SAINI DATE OF HEARING : 25.07.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.08.2013 O R D E R PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(APPEALS), SHIMLA DATED 25.02.2013 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUND OF APPEAL : 1. THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS) HAS ERRED TO DECIDE CASE EXPERTE OF THE APPELLANT WITHO UT AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 2. THAT THE NOTICE DATED 15-1-2013 OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DID NOT RECE IVE BY THE APPELLANT AND THE CASE DECIDED EXPARTE IS LIABLE T O BE SET ASIDE TO BE HEARD AFRESH. 3. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS AGGRIEVED BY THE EX-PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(APPEALS). THE CLAIM OF THE ASSES SEE BEFORE US WAS THAT THE LAST NOTICE OF HEARING WAS NOT SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE, WHO IS SITUATED 2 IN VILLAGE PRINI IN THE INTERIORS OF HIMACHAL PRADE SH AND HENCE, THE DEFAULT IN NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) ON THE APP OINTED DATE OF HEARING. 4. THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE, ON THE OTHER HAND, POINTED OUT THAT VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES WERE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE AND HE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT ON SOME DATES AND ON THE OTHER DATES, H E DID NOT APPEAR. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESEN T APPEAL IS AGAINST EX- PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(APPEALS) AND NON-ALLO WANCE OF REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. FROM THE P ERUSAL OF THE APPELLATE ORDER, WE FIND THAT THE APPEAL IN THE CASE WAS FIXE D FOR HEARING ON 06.08.2012 ON WHICH DATE WRITTEN REQUEST WAS MADE B Y THE ASSESSEE FOR FIXING THE CASE AT CAMP OFFICE AT PARWANOO. THE CA SE WAS ADJOURNED TO 19.09.2012 AND A NOTICE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR ON THE SAID DATE OF HEARING AND ANOTHER NOTI CE WAS ISSUED ON 06.11.2012 FOR APPEARANCE ON 10.12.2012. THERE IS A SECOND NOTING BY THE CIT(APPEALS) THAT ON 06.12.2012, THE HEARING WAS FI XED FOR 11.12.2012 AND COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS INTIMATED TELEPHONI CALLY, WHO DID NOT APPEAR ON 11.12.2012. THEREAFTER, ANOTHER NOTICE W AS ISSUED ON 15.01.2013 TO APPEAR AT THE CAMP OFFICE AT PARWANOO ON 18.02.2013. AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO APPEAR ON THE SAID DATE, THE MATTER WAS DECIDED EX- PARTE. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE ABOVESAID PROCEEDIN GS BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS), WE FIND THAT THERE IS OVER-LAPPING OF THE NOTICES BEING ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE PROCEEDINGS BEING HE LD BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS). IN THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS AND CIR CUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE, WE DEEM IT FIT TO RESTORE THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(APPEALS) WITH DIRECTI ONS TO ALLOW REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESS EE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO COMPLY WITH THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE CIT(APPEALS) WHO SHALL DECIDE THE 3 MATTER ON MERITS RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IN AC CORDANCE WITH LAW. THUS, THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 2 ND DAY OF AUG., 2013. SD/- SD/- (T.R.SOOD) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMB ER DATED : 2 ND AUG.,2013 POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH